지원사업
학술연구/단체지원/교육 등 연구자 활동을 지속하도록 DBpia가 지원하고 있어요.
커뮤니티
연구자들이 자신의 연구와 전문성을 널리 알리고, 새로운 협력의 기회를 만들 수 있는 네트워킹 공간이에요.
초록· 키워드
오류제보하기
This article interrogates the political power of the film by analysing Leni Riefenstahl"s Olympia (1938). Olympia, the documentary film in which put Berlin Olympic of 1936, has been paid great compliments of German and World commentators and people due to its high artistry. And so, it have gained appraisals as the unpolitical art film that held on to the fairness corresponding to the spirit of Olympic. In this respect, it has compared with her previous work, the Triumph of the Will(1935), condemned to be political for treating the national convention of Nazis.
However, Berlin Olympic of 1936 was the most political in the history of modern Olympic. The Third Reich intended successfully to make use of Olympic as a political instrument. Riefenstahl actualized this intention of Nazis by making Olympia. In virtue of this film, Berlin Olympic could have been viewed to be unpolitical for a while without some doubts. Olympia was the film produced officially by Nazis that designed to embellish this political event into the unpolitical. This film was supported and benefited by Nazis from its planning stage to its making, advertisement, and distribution. In those days when was the dark age for German cineaste, Leni Riefenstahl was almost the only one beneficiary of the Third Reich.
After the World War Ⅱ, Riefenstahl had been on trial for being a movie baron of the Third Reich. In spite of controversies, she was finally granted the social pardon. She had conducted unceasingly her career as movie artist, and claimed the copyrights of her works. The people and critics did not deem her works as the vestiges of the Third Reich, and guaranteed her works to be an art. This poses the problem of art and ethics. It means that ‘lust" and ‘caution" can not be simply distinguished in dichotomous way. We are used to unconsciously yield to temptation that wish leave the ethics behind the art. But Olympia shows well the inconvenient truth that the art never can be righteous in itself.
However, Berlin Olympic of 1936 was the most political in the history of modern Olympic. The Third Reich intended successfully to make use of Olympic as a political instrument. Riefenstahl actualized this intention of Nazis by making Olympia. In virtue of this film, Berlin Olympic could have been viewed to be unpolitical for a while without some doubts. Olympia was the film produced officially by Nazis that designed to embellish this political event into the unpolitical. This film was supported and benefited by Nazis from its planning stage to its making, advertisement, and distribution. In those days when was the dark age for German cineaste, Leni Riefenstahl was almost the only one beneficiary of the Third Reich.
After the World War Ⅱ, Riefenstahl had been on trial for being a movie baron of the Third Reich. In spite of controversies, she was finally granted the social pardon. She had conducted unceasingly her career as movie artist, and claimed the copyrights of her works. The people and critics did not deem her works as the vestiges of the Third Reich, and guaranteed her works to be an art. This poses the problem of art and ethics. It means that ‘lust" and ‘caution" can not be simply distinguished in dichotomous way. We are used to unconsciously yield to temptation that wish leave the ethics behind the art. But Olympia shows well the inconvenient truth that the art never can be righteous in itself.
목차
머리말
Ⅰ. 텍스트로 본 영화 ≪올림피아≫
Ⅱ. 콘텍스트로 본 ≪올림피아≫
맺음말
Abstract
참고문헌 (1)
참고문헌 신청
이 논문의 저자 정보
이 논문과 함께 이용한 논문
최근 본 자료
댓글(0)
0
UCI(KEPA) : I410-ECN-0101-2014-911-000608687